SE-022 EFFECT OF CREATIVE LEARNING TECHNIQUES AND ...sitsefmipa.unimed.ac.id/proceeding2014/sitse2014/SE-22-Purwanto.pdf · Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam ... The research

Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam

The Center of Excellency

Proceeding: The First International Seminar on Trends in Science and Science Education 2014 – ISBN 978-602-9115-37-6

494 Universitas Negeri Medan The Character Building University

SE-022

EFFECT OF CREATIVE LEARNING TECHNIQUES AND REASONING ABILITY TOWARD STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN PHYSICS

Purwanto

ABSTRACT

This research is aimed at finding out and describing the interaction between instructional technique and reasoning ability in physics studies.The population of this research was the second year students at MTsN 2 Medan, 2009/2010 academic year.The number of population was 375 students distributed in 9 classes. Two classes were taken as the sample of the research was 86 students chosen by cluster random sampling technique. The research used two test instrumentation, they are achievement in physics test and reasoning Ability test. Psycho test which was given to the students for making classification, the reasoning ability that has been owned by the students which formal and concrete reasoning ability. The test used for reasoning ability was Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT). The research method used quasi experiment with factorial design 2x2. The data were analysed by Variance Analysis (ANAVA) two ways within 0.05 level of significance by Lilliefors test to carried out the prerequisite test for the normality and Bartlet test for homogenity variant and post hoc test used Tuckey test. The finding of the research showed at: There was an interaction between instructional technique (creative-divergent or active-convergent) and reasoning ability (formal or concrete) toward achievement in physics studies with Fr = 5.71 > Ft = 4.02 on α = 0.05 with dk (1.56). Based on this research finding that the jigsaw creative-divergent instructional technique are more effective to students with formal reasoning ability, whereas the students with concrete reasoning ability are more effective to used active-convergent instructional technique. This means, that to selection instructional technique should have to considering the students reasoning ability aspect. Keywords: Creative Learning, Reasoning Ability, Physics studies.

INTRODUCTION

Development of logical thinking, critical, creative, and initiative in education is a

national policy. Awareness of the importance of the development of creative thinking

policies be authorized to carry out innovations in science education that includes physics

lesson. Subjects Physics as the basis of science is one part science that became the

backbone of a wide range of applied science and technology such as agro-industry. Given

the important role of the subjects of physics, as described above, the teaching of physics

that should receive serious attention.

From the preliminary study on the teaching of physics in schools MTs 2 Medan

found that the value of physics at MTs Negeri 2 Medan still not as expected because they

are relatively low. According to data of the average value obtained during the last four

Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu

Pengetahuan Alam

The Center of Excellency Proceeding: The First International Seminar on Trends in Science and Science Education 2014 – ISBN 978-602-9115-37-6

Universitas Negeri Medan 495 The Character Building University

years not to reach a value of 4.0. These results can be considered representative to be a

reference point for considering MTs 2 field as the parent of Medan's city Madrasah

Working Group has established the value of the Minimum Criteria for completeness (KKM)

subjects Physics is 6.5. In the preliminary study also found complaints from teachers of

physics that in general the students still have difficulty in understanding the physics of

matter, especially in solving problems related to the analysis of experimental results or

process skills and many of the students did not understand the topic of theoretical physics

even as well as a matter of mathematical formulas.

This low yield can not be separated from the implementation of the learning process

is done. Despite various efforts in the improvement, development and innovation of

physics learning through curriculum revision will always and will continue to be

implemented to improve the quality of education in Indonesia. But complaints about the

difficulty of learning physics still continue to be found. This will cause negative impacts

that affect students' attitudes toward physics lesson. Of the general fact that there is, on

the position of physics in everyday life and also the fact mastery of physics, especially for

students of MTs Negeri 2 Medan, it appears that there is a gap between expectations and

reality. Many students are already considered physics as a subject that is very difficult,

difficult, complicated and boring, uninteresting and even frightening and also not very

useful in everyday life. This is in line with that expressed Boediono (2004) that: Currently

math and science education, including physics is in a dilemma because on one hand

there is a strong demand to master both of these subjects as intermediate targets for the

master of science and technology, while on the other many the results reported failure to

teaching physics at a very alarming level.

According to the observations author one of the causes of failure is due to physics

learning strategies and delivery methods that are less precise. This is consistent with that

expressed by Suryosubroto (2002) that the weakness of the teaching is done by teachers

at the school are: 1) lack of ability of teachers using a variety of learning methods, 2) the

ability of teachers to teach limited only to answer the questions, 3) teachers are reluctant

to change teaching methods are already considered to be correct and effective and, 4) the

teacher uses only conventional learning methods without regard to aspects of student

thinking.

Difficulty learning and teaching of physics can be defined as a condition that the

process of understanding and solving problems of physics there are certain obstacles to

achieving good results. It all can be caused by several factors, both external factors such

as student teaching strategies, infrastructure and facilities, the ability of teachers and





social environment or internal factors of students who are expected to have impacted the

results of which are studied physics reasoning abilities of students. In fact, every individual

has the ability to think differently, so that the learning that occurs in them is also different.

Optimal quality of learning should be able to overcome this difference in achieving the

goals set. Therefore how physics should be taught? Of course we need a technique,

strategies or approaches that are appropriate for the learning of physics. One of the

efforts made to enable student learning is the learning that uses a technique that

emphasizes creative learning activity of students in giving opinions, ideas and search for

answers. Students learn in a group each member of mutual cooperation and help to

understand the learning materials and communicate the results of placement to the

students so as to liven up the class. It also can empower students or focus on student to

become a productive and enjoyable class.

Creative learning techniques and varied will make students feel interested in what is

presented by the teacher. Teachers are able to provide creative learning techniques are

likely to be able to manage the classroom well. As noted Hutagaol (1992) that deals with

the problem of learning difficulties learning techniques. This is understandable because

the ultimate goal is to facilitate the application of learning techniques students learn to

achieve the learning objectives appropriate predetermined. Active learning techniques are

learning techniques to develop convergent-divergent thinking skills in an integrated

manner, while creative learning techniques are learning techniques to develop a

convergent-divergent thinking skills gradually. Active-learning techniques are convergent

technique physics experiments using student worksheets usual in learning physics

teacher at MTs Negeri 2 Medan. Active learning techniques and creative-convergent-

divergent is learning together based on process skills approach. The difference there is in

the way of implementation of the learning process. Active-divergent techniques focus on

the development of analytical thinking towards a concept, while the creative-divergent

techniques focus on the development of imaginative thinking to grow the diversity of

ideas.

Development of creative learning techniques in physics learning has been applied in

the form of "Process Skills", in accordance with the definition of creativity by Torrence

(1988). Process skills approach using active learning techniques tend to form students in

systematic habits. Budikase and Kertiasa (1995) suggested that physics is a science that

requires more understanding than penghapalan and key to the success of students in

learning physics is the ability of students to understand the basic physics of three things,

namely the concepts (understanding), laws or principles physics, and the physics theories


Pengetahuan Alam



that all of the success was grounded by reasoning ability and skill acquisition process.

Learning the skills approach aims to overcome the existing differences in student ability.

By enabling students in meaningful learning, process skills approach not only provide new

knowledge to students, but also enhance the ability of thinking.

Physics learning techniques on the basis of the application process skills approach

seems not just a technical issue methodological course, but related to the more

fundamental problem, namely socio-cultural with a more specialized psychological factors.

Therefore, it would need to be innovative in teaching physics to increase the interest and

motivation of students to develop not only think logically and analytically, but also

initiatives and creative. Other studies have shown that there is no readiness of teachers to

develop skills in teaching physics processes. It gives the sense that the students lack

invited to participate actively in the learning process is active both physically and mentally

active.

Based on the overall description above, researchers consider it important to conduct

research with the title: Influence Techniques Creative Learning and Reasoning Ability

Against Learning Outcomes Physics at MTs Negeri 2 Medan. This study was conducted

to determine:

1. The difference in the effect of divergent creative learning techniques with active-

learning techniques converge towards physics student learning outcomes MTs 2

field in the form of process skills abilities.

2. The difference in the effect of reasoning ability of the student learning outcomes

physics MTs 2 field in the form of process skills abilities.

3. The effect of the interaction between engineering students' learning and reasoning

ability of the student learning outcomes physics MTs 2 field in the form of process

skills abilities.

METHODOLOGY

This research was conducted at the school Madrasyah State Tsanawiyah 2 Medan,

Jl. Pratun 3 Medan. The timing of the study from October to December 2009. The timing

of treatment in this study carried out by adjusting the schedule of physics lessons at the

school. Thus the process of learning to walk appropriately as usual. The treatment was

carried out for 8 weeks and for each meeting lasted 2 x 40 minutes.

The target population is the study, all eighth grade students of MTs Negeri 2 Medan

2009-2010 school year in the first semester (odd), totaling 380 students consisting of 9





classes. Sampling is the study of eighth grade students as much as 2 classes, conducted

by the consideration that the age of the child at the time (11-13 years) are at the level of

intellectual development with regard to the ability of reasoning, namely concrete and

formal levels. The self-test instrument made in 2 (two) classes are defined, namely 1 (one)

class is a class that has never received dieksperimenkan subject matter and one more

class that has never received a dieksperimenkan subject matter, while the implementation

of the treatment carried out in two classes chosen at random, with the drawn (cluster

random sampling).

This research was conducted by using a quasi-experimental methods, the

independent variables are engineering students' learning and reasoning abilities. The

dependent variable is the result of learning such skills mastery learning physics.

Experimental research design used is a simple 2 x 2 factorial in this design, each of the

two independent variables it has two levels. The independent variable learning

techniques, consisting of "creative learning techniques and active learning techniques

divergent-convergent". Effect of experimental treatments subject to the dependent

variable was assessed every level other variables. Matrix of the design is illustrated in

Table 1.

Table 1. : 2x2 Factorial Experimental Design

Technique Learning (A) Reasoning Ability (B)

Learning Techniques creative-divergent (A 1)

Learning Techniques Active-convergent (A 2)

Reasoning ability: Formal Stage (B 1) I II Reasoning ability: Phase Concrete (B 2) III IV Source: Donald Ary, Lucy Cheser Jacobs, Asghar Razavieh Introduction Reserch in Education (New York: Longman, 1989): I = group stage of formal reasoning ability students who receive instruction in physics with divergent creative learning techniques, II = group stage of formal reasoning ability students who receive instruction in physics with active learning techniques-convergent, III = group stage Concrete reasoning ability students who receive instruction in physics with divergent creative learning techniques, IV = group stage Concrete reasoning ability students who receive instruction in physics with active learning techniques-convergent.

Data was collected using a test and measurement. Data obtained reasoning skills

using instruments developed by Tobin capabilities and Copie (adapted into Indonesian by

Moh. Nur, 1991) and re-test by researchers. Tabulation of the value of the test results

were grouped by high scores and low scores. Measurement reasoning abilities of students

performed before treatment research goes. This measurement is intended to select

students capable of reasoning formal stage (high scores) with reasoning ability students


Pengetahuan Alam



concrete stage (low scores) in order to obtain a group of students in accordance with the

treatment.

Data on student learning outcomes in the form of skills acquired the skills to use the

test results developed Learning Physics researcher. Measurement of student learning

outcomes physics research conducted after the treatment is completed. Initial tests are

not performed in this study, assuming prior knowledge of students who studied in a

homogeneous state, because it is in the same class and level. The results of these tests

are then analyzed variance testing the effect of learning techniques for physics learning

outcomes, as well as the interaction between engineering students' learning and

reasoning skills to the learning outcomes of physics.

Instruments used to collect the data consists of two instruments, namely: (a) Test

Results Learning Physics, and (b) Formal Reasoning Ability Test.The type of instrument

used to measure learning outcomes is Test Results Learning (achievement test) which

measures the ability of a particular individual. The shape of the tests used are essays by

some of the statements and calculations for each test item. Therefore for each item have

different weights. But even so for each correct answer was given an average score of 2

(two). Score physics student learning outcomes defined as the sum score of correct

answers divided by the overall score test items multiplied by 100%. Grating test learning

outcomes in the form of process skills are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Grille physics achievement test

No Process skills Indicator Taxonomy Nbr. Problem

1 Observation 1.1. Mentioned equation 1.2. Observe the relevant

C1

C4

1, 2

2 Interpretation of data

2.1.Mention pattern of a number of data 2.2.Mention similarity of someinformation

C1

C1 3, 4

3 Application/ applying the concept of

3.1. Explaining the events with the concept of interconnected 3.2. Applying the concept in a new situation

C3

C3 5, 6

4 Communi cate

4.1. Stating table or graph verbally 4.2. Explaining based trend 4.3. Translate statements based on criteria

C3

C2

C4

7, 8 and 9

5 Hypothesize Explain the relationship that may occur C2 10

Specification: C1= Remember, C2 = Understand, C3 = Apply, C4 = Analyze

Measurement instruments used formal reasoning ability in the study was "Test of

Logical Thinking" (Tolt) developed by Kenneth Tobin and William Capie. Tolt tangible

paper-and-pencil test that uses the format of choice with a selection of answers and

reasons. Piaget has shown the presence of four different levels of cognitive development

are arranged in a hierarchical structure. The fourth level is: sensorimotor (birth - 2 years);





preoperational (2-7 years); concrete operations (7-11 years); and formal operational (11

years and over).

The first two levels pleased with sensory-motor capabilities, the development of

symbolic functions and language. The next two levels pleased with the development of

reasoning. In terms of age, the first secondary school students for the last two levels.

There are similarities between the level of concrete operations and the level of formal

operations, which both use the logical operation. However, both qualitatively different

levels of the reasoning. There are five characteristics that distinguishes them is,

proportional reasoning, control of variables, probability reasoning, correlational reasoning,

and combinatorial reasoning.

In 1991 Prof. Dr Mohamad Nur adapting Tolt into Formal Reasoning Ability Test

(TKPF). Tolt adaptation into Indonesian done by translating and adjusting the condition of

Indonesia. The result of this adaptation is used to measure the ability of formal reasoning

student in this study. Because the adaptation has been done for a long time (1991) there

will be tested again to see full-laden good measuring tool.

Table 3. Lattice Instruments Formal Reasoning Ability

No Indicator Number of Item Problem

1 Proportional Reasoning 1 and 2 2 Control variables 3 and 4 3 Probability Reasoning 5 and 6 4 Reasoning correlations 7 and 8 5 Reasoning Combinatorial 9 and 10

The answer to the test items are justified only if the two of them, both the answer

and the reason is selected correctly. Tobin and Capie give meaning scores (range of

values) are achieved as Table 4.

Table 4. Range Value Level Reasoning

Score Level Reasoning 0 – 1 Concrete 2 – 3 Transition 4 – 5 Early Formal 6 – 10 Formal

For research purposes as proposed by Nur (1991), a group of students level

concrete reasoning can be taken from students who scores his TKPF between 0 (zero) up

to 3, and formal reasoning level student groups taken from students who scored 4 to 10.


Pengetahuan Alam



Tests that have been prepared, previously tested in other subjects to see if the test is

standard and meets the requirements for use as a means of collecting student data. The

test is done in two different classes with the respondents are students of class IX and

class VII of the two classes are included in the population but outside of each sample of

40 students. Analysis of the terms of the validity or the validity of test items using

techniques with t test (Mehren in Badiran, 1998). To determine the internal coefficient

consistensy Reliability essay tests used formula Alpha (Arifin, 1991) which is then

converted to r table. While the analysis of item difficulty levels used to find the formula

proportions and distinguishing about the difference in the proportion of the formula above

and below (Arikunto: 2005), with the purpose to see the characteristics of each item,

which includes the level of difficulty of questions, distinguishing features, reliability

measurement and dissemination answers .

To analyze the data that has been collected in this study used the technique

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 2x2 factorial two-lane, before first tested the requirements

of data analysis and hypothesis testing. Statistical hypothesis testing in this study using

the technique of analysis of variance (ANOVA) and two lines for each of the variables and

their interactions, as well as significance testing between cells with Tuckey technique at a

significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Data Description Reasoning Ability. Data on students' reasoning ability scores

obtained from the Formal Reasoning Ability Test (TKPF). Tests performed on the entire

student sample, namely class VIII.6 and VIII.7 MTs 2 field with the number of students 68

people. Scores obtained range between 0 to 8, the average score of 2.85 and a standard

deviation of 1.63, 2.00 mode and median of 3.00.

Table 5. Deskripsi Data Reasoning Ability Students MTsN 2 field. Parameter Startistik A-1 A-2 ∑ B-1 x

n

S 15 4,40 0,82

15 4,81 0,75

30 4,58 0,94

B-2 x

n

S 15 2,21 1,10

15 1,83 1,05

30 1,78 0,80

∑ x

n

s 30 2,83 1,56

30 2,67 1,50

60 2,85 1,50

A-1 = group of students studying physics with creative learning techniques-divergent, A-2 = group of students studying physics with active learning techniques-convergent, B-1 = student group





capable of reasoning formal operations, B-2 = group of students capable of reasoning concrete operations, n = Many of the samples in each group, x = The average score learning outcomes, s = Standard deviation

Student Formal Reasoning. Based on the data obtained, the students are capable of

learning outcomes of formal reasoning in class taught by creative-divergent learning

techniques, the highest value of 72 and the lowest value of 38. The average value was

57.20 and standard deviation of 8.96, while the median 55, 85 and 65.5 mode. From the

calculations in the table below were obtained frequency distribution as in the following:

Table 6. Score Frequency Distribution Student learning outcomes are capable of formal reasoning techniques taught by creative-divergent learning

No Class Interval Absolute Frequency Relative Frequency

1 38 – 44 2 13.33% 2 45 – 51 3 20.00% 3 52 – 58 4 26.67% 4 59 – 65 4 26.67% 5 66 – 72 2 13.33%

Total 15 100%

Furthermore, from Table 3.2 above, it appears that students are capable of learning

outcomes of formal reasoning taught by creative-divergent learning techniques that are

above average as many as 6 people (40%), which is at an average of 4 people (26 , 67%)

and under an average of 5 people (33.33%). Histogram learning outcomes of formal

reasoning ability students who are taught by creative-divergent learning techniques can

be seen in the image below:

Learning Outcomes Students. Based on the data obtained, the students are capable

of learning outcomes concrete reasoning taught by creative-divergent learning techniques,

the highest value of 54 and the lowest value of 25. The average value was 41.10 and the

standard deviation of 8.01, while the median 41.75 and 48.5 mode. It appears that

students are capable of learning outcomes concrete reasoning taught by creative-

divergent learning technique which is above the average of 7 people (46.67%), which is at

an average of 4 persons (26.67%) and under an average of 4 people (26.66%).

Active Learning Techniques-convergent. Based on the data obtained, the students

are capable of learning outcomes of formal reasoning taught by active learning

techniques-convergent, the highest value of 56 and the lowest value of 37. The average

value was 47.30 and the standard deviation of 4.59, while the median 44.3 and 48.16

mode. It appears that students are capable of learning outcomes of formal reasoning

taught by active-learning techniques that are converging on average as many as 6 people

(40%), which is at an average of 5 people (33, 33%) and which is below the average of 4


Pengetahuan Alam



people (26.67%). Histogram learning outcomes of formal reasoning ability students who

are taught by active-learning techniques can be seen converging on the image below:

Learning Outcames Student who Capable concrete reasoning in Class taught by

Active Learning Techniques-convergent. Based on the data obtained, the students are

capable of learning outcomes concrete reasoning taught by active learning techniques-

convergent, the highest value of 58 and the lowest value of 29. The average value was

44.30 and standard deviation of 8.13, while the median 33.25 and 45.5 mode. It appears

that students are capable of learning outcomes concrete reasoning taught by active-

learning techniques that are converging on an average of 3 people (20%), which is at an

average of 5 people (33 , 33%) and under an average of 7 people (46.67%).

Research Hypothesis Testing. To test the three hypotheses of the study using a 2x2

factorial Analysis of Variance (2 lanes). For statistical data required in the ANOVA test

with two lines are presented in Table 4.12 which covers a number of subjects per group

(N), the total amount of data (ΣX), the sum of squares of data (ΣX2), and the average

value of the subject group. The average value of each group were analyzed statistically to

determine whether the average values are significantly different or not. The values of this

statistic is used as the basis for the decision to test the research hypothesis. Digunaan

testing criteria is if F count is greater than the F table (F-count> F-table) at significance

level 0.05, then Ho is rejected and vice versa if F count is smaller than F table (F-count

<F-table) then Ho is accepted.

Table 10. Table Statistics Research

Reasoning Ability

Statistik Technique Kreatif-Divergen Technique Aktif-Konvergen TOT

FORMAL N 15 15 30

X 858 717 1575

2x 50310 34637 84947

x 57.20 47.80 52.50

CONCRITE N 15 15 30

X 638 646 1284

2x 28098 28892 56990

x 42.53 43.07 42.80

TOTAL N 30 30 60

X 1496 1363 2859

2x 78408 63529 141937

x 49.87 45.43 47.65





The following is a summary table which presents the ANOVA calculations two lines

of research.

Table 11. Summary of Results of ANOVA 2 x 2

Variation JK dk RJK Fhitung Ftabel (0.05)

Resioning Ability 1411,35 1 1411,35 21,78 4,02

Learning Techniques 294,82 1 294,82 4,54 4,02

Interaction between reasoning ability and learning techniques

370,02 1 370,02 5,71 4,02

Galat (KP x TP) 3629,47 56 64,81

These results are in accordance with the basic theories have been put forward in

chapter II, but if there is data obtained explored more deeply, then by using the provisions

of reasoning ability grouping stage of Tobin and Capie (in Nur, 1991), the average student

who studied are at a transitional stage the majority (95.64%) were in the range of concrete

stage to the early stages of the formal, the mode and median concrete reasoning stage in

the transition phase and only 5 people (5.33%) which is at the stage of formal reasoning

true .

The unification of the student group berpenalaran early stage of formal into formal

stage in this study, may cause weakness second hypothesis of this study. Merging 31

students early stage of formal reasoning ability in a formal student group stage, giving the

sense that 86% of the student group stage of formal reasoning. This is what may cause

the results of analysis of variance were performed showing the results of a group of

students studying physics formal reasoning ability. To prove this conjecture should be

held reflikasi studies with subjects that clearly demonstrate the ability of reasoning certain

stage. The third hypothesis testing showed that the interaction between learning

techniques reasoning with reasoning ability of students who give different effect on

learning outcomes physics.

Students are capable of reasoning concrete stage tend to have a mindset that is

limited to a concrete object. In this student, what you want to think that is limited to a

concrete object. In this student, what you want is expressed on a limited or more objects

in the physical nature of the object, as well as in states similarities, differences, or the

relationship will be sourced on the properties of the object. For this group of students is

more appropriate given the learning techniques that preceded the development exercise

flexibility and freedom of thought. With these exercises students are accustomed to

receiving a wide range of alternative possibilities. Only then given exercises analytical and

logical thinking.


Pengetahuan Alam



In contrast to the formal stage berpenalaran students who have a systematic pattern

of thought and reflective, the activities in the form of divergent thinking exercises do not

give great meaning. Students at the stage of formal reasoning more in line with the

learning that has been systematic. This thought clarify results of this study, which reported

an interaction between learning and reasoning techniques for physics learning outcomes.

From the results of further tests showed that acquisition, learning outcomes physics

student groups capable of reasoning formal stage of learning with creative-divergent

learning techniques, together with a group of formal reasoning ability students who learn

by active learning techniques-convergent. This acquisition proves that divergent thinking

exercise in creative-divergent learning techniques are not particularly helpful for the formal

berpenalaran, in mastering the science process skills.

Students who have been at the stage of formal reasoning used to think analytically

and logically, so that when the learning process is faced worksheets that have systematic,

they can follow it. Unlike the students berpenalaran concrete stage yet so logical thought

patterns, learning with student worksheets passes without a deep significance. This

proved to earn a further test which showed that the physics student learning outcomes

berpenalaran formal learning stage with active-convergent technique is better than

concrete berpenalaran students who learn by active-convergent techniques, rather than

formal stage berpenalaran students learn the techniques of creative-divergent . Likewise,

the results of studying physics students learn concrete stage with creative techniques-

divergent better better than students who studied the same berpenalaran active-

convergent technique. These results provide evidence that the creative-divergent learning

techniques give students the best if used at the stage of reasoning is concrete. Thus it can

be said that the practice of divergent thinking is the foundation and a means for students

to master the physics lesson to the charge process skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data acquisition, test hypotheses, and discussion of the results, it can

be concluded as follows:

1. Learning techniques applied in teaching and learning physics in MTs 2 field in this

study, affect learning outcomes in the form of skill acquisition process. Application-

divergent creative learning techniques provide higher physics learning outcomes,

compared with the application of active learning techniques-convergent.





2. The results showed that, the proceeds of reasoning ability students learn physics

formal stage proved to be different with the acquisition of learning outcomes physics

reasoning ability students concrete stage. It can be concluded that the differences in

students' reasoning abilities significant impact on the acquisition of physics learning

outcomes in the form of skill acquisition process.

3. There is an interaction between engineering students' learning and reasoning abilities

that give a different effect on the results of the process of learning physics in the form

of skills. The difference in effect are: (a.) For students reasoning formal stage,

creative-divergent learning techniques produce the same physics learning acquisition

with active learning techniques-convergent.(b). For students reasoning concrete stage,

creative-divergent learning techniques produce better learning gains than active

learning techniques-convergent.(c). Application-divergent creative learning produces

acquisition physics learning outcomes for students better than students reasoning

concrete stage reasoning formal stage.(d). The application of active learning-

convergent generate acquisition physics learning outcomes for students better than

students reasoning formal stage reasoning concrete stage.

REFERENCES

Arikunto.S. 2005. Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Penerbit Bumi Aksara. Jakarta.

Ary, Donald. 1989. Introduction Research in Education. New York: Longman.

Bloom, B.S. et all. 1956. Taxonomy of Education Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longman Inc.

Budi. S. 2008. Fisika Untuk Sekolah Menengah Pertama dan MTs Kelas VIII. Jakarta : PT. Gramedia Widia Sarana Indonesia.

Dick, W. & Reiser R.A. 1989. Planning Effective Instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Druxes, H ., Born B. & Siemsen F. 1983. Kompendium Didaktik Fisika. Bandung: Remadja Karya.

Gagne, Robert M. 1985. The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt Rinehart, and Winston.

Munandar, S.C. Utami 1981. Creativity and Education: A Study of The Relationships Between Measures of Creative Thinking and a Number of Educational Variabels in Indonesian Primary and Junior Secondary Schools. Jakarta: Direktorat P3M, Dikti Depdikbud.

Nur, Muhamad. 1991. Pengadaptasian Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT) dalam Seting Indonesia. Laporan Penelitian, Pusat Penelitian IKIP Surabaya.

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. 1958. The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescience. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul LTD.


Pengetahuan Alam



Semiawan, Conny et al. 1988. Dimensi Kreatif Dalam Filsafat Ilmu. Jakarta: Remaja Karya CV.

Treffinger, Donald J. 1980. Encouranging Creativa Learning For Gifted and Talented. Ventura. California: Ventura Cauntry Superintendent of Schools Office.

Torrance, E. Paul. 1988. The Nature of Creativity as Manifest in is Testing. Dalam: The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psycological Perspective. Ed. Robert J Stenberg. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Trianto. 2008. Mendesain Pembelajaran Kontekstual (Contextual Teaching and Learning) di Kelas. Jakarta: Cerdas Pustaka Publisher.

Wardiman, D.1992. Pengajaran IPA di Sekolah Dasar dan Menengah Menyongsong Keperluan IPTEK di Masa Depan. FMIPA Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Bandung.

Washton, Nathan S. 1974. Teaching Science in Elementary and Middle Schools. New York: David Mc. Kay Company, Inc.

Documents

SE-022 EFFECT OF CREATIVE LEARNING TECHNIQUES AND ...sitsefmipa.unimed.ac.id/proceeding2014/sitse2014/SE-22-Purwanto.pdf · Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam ... The research